YouGov Poll - 33 Point lead!

Trug said:
How so?
Click to expand...

There are many different types of PR systems and that's before deciding how a parliament would look. It would realistically need multiple referendums and a vastly greater information campaign just to get to an informed choice. The AV referendum was rubbish at explaining what AV even was, we can't do that again.

If we just stuck a load of PR models on a ballot and said go nuts, that's would pretty much guarantee a very costly chaos.
 
BlindBoyGrunt said:
But why the no-can-do attitude? If it is vital then we have to do it. We're a modern European country with capabilities.
Click to expand...
It's telling that nobody was talking about Corbyn's lack of pr in his 2019 manifesto. One that was hailed by momentum as the most radical manifesto in a generation.

You want starmer to commit to something you never called out Corbyn for not including.

That's interesting.
 
BoroMart said:
I was more perturbed about the non-equivalence of his point to get any attempts at ‘humour’
Click to expand...
Of course there was equivalence.

You asked me for a precise definition of the term I used as if I'd deliberately used it in a clinical context which was clearly not the intent.

I asked you for the definition of the term you used as if you'd deliberately used it when it was clearly a typo.

You were the one shouting about "clarity of message" instead of just admitting you'd made a mistake by accusing me of calling Starmer a psychopath - something you still haven't had the decency to admit didn't happen. A little humility would have nipped it all in the bud. However, you wanted to keep up the pretence that you couldn't possibly have made an error of judgement, forcing me to defend myself. I'm not going to roll over and be bullied into accepting fault on my part where there is none.
 
Scrote said:
Of course there was equivalence.

You asked me for a precise definition of the term I used as if I'd deliberately used it in a clinical context which was clearly not the intent.

I asked you for the definition of the term you used as if you'd deliberately used it when it was clearly a typo.

You were the one shouting about "clarity of message" instead of just admitting you'd made a mistake by accusing me of calling Starmer a psychopath - something you still haven't had the decency to admit didn't happen. A little humility would have nipped it all in the bud. However, you wanted to keep up the pretence that you couldn't possibly have made an error of judgement, forcing me to defend myself. I'm not going to roll over and be bullied into accepting fault on my part where there is none.
Click to expand...
Snoooooooze can’t be bothered reading more of your nonsense
 
Chris_Boro said:
There are many different types of PR systems and that's before deciding how a parliament would look. It would realistically need multiple referendums and a vastly greater information campaign just to get to an informed choice. The AV referendum was rubbish at explaining what AV even was, we can't do that again.

If we just stuck a load of PR models on a ballot and said go nuts, that's would pretty much guarantee a very costly chaos.
Click to expand...
Brexit, and the clusterfuck that followed, would mean the political classes would make sure that couldn't happen again.

Clegg's PR referendum was scuppered by Cameron only offering a poor choice of AV. That was a deliberate attempt to make the referendum fail. Cameron basically tried the same thing with Brexit and miscalculated badly. He then walked away when he was the only person who could realistically have mitigted the effects of the Brexit result.

There's no way that they'd go to a referendum without absolute clarity on the options and the voting system - presumably a multiple effort approach over a number of years.

Political will is the only ingredient that appears to be in short supply.

Laughing said:
It's telling that nobody was talking about Corbyn's lack of pr in his 2019 manifesto.
Click to expand...
I regularly posted to that effect - and long before 2019. It was one of the few things about which I felt disappointment with Corbyn.

I've wanted PR as far back as Blair and voted for the abomination we were offered in Clegg's referendum because it was the only change on offer.
 
Scrote said:
It's a couple of lines and a paragraph - you've already read it.

What you actually mean is you know you're wrong and you don't have the decency to admit it.
Click to expand...
Snooze, it’s boring mate. Get over yourself move on, nobody’s interested in your nonsense
 
HolgateCorner said:
That’s an old part of this thread and I think one or two anti Labour/Starmer posters showed a few gaps when discussing the current electricity industry.
Click to expand...
Which gaps?

The point we (you and I) were disagreeing on was whether or not the government could provide finance for new power production facilities that remained in public ownership.

The answer, as I see it, is that they can - in exactly the same way as they'd fund any private-partnership venture that was then owned and operated privately.

The shortfall in profit expectations would have to be accounted for but there's nothing other than political will preventing public ownership.
 
Scrote said:
Brexit, and the clusterfuck that followed, would mean the political classes would make sure that couldn't happen again.

Clegg's PR referendum was scuppered by Cameron only offering a poor choice of AV. That was a deliberate attempt to make the referendum fail. Cameron basically tried the same thing with Brexit and miscalculated badly. He then walked away when he was the only person who could realistically have mitigted the effects of the Brexit result.

There's no way that they'd go to a referendum without absolute clarity on the options and the voting system - presumably a multiple effort approach over a number of years.

Political will is the only ingredient that appears to be in short supply.


I regularly posted to that effect - and long before 2019. It was one of the few things about which I felt disappointment with Corbyn.

I've wanted PR as far back as Blair and voted for the abomination we were offered in Clegg's referendum because it was the only change on offer.
Click to expand...

What you've said forms part of my reservations about PR. If we wiped everyone's memories and voted for a new electoral system, PR would have a great chance of success.

However, a lot of turd filled water has passed under the PR bridge, largely thanks to Cameron.
 
Laughing said:
It's telling that nobody was talking about Corbyn's lack of pr in his 2019 manifesto. One that was hailed by momentum as the most radical manifesto in a generation.

You want starmer to commit to something you never called out Corbyn for not including.

That's interesting.
Click to expand...
PR is something I've always been a proponent of but let's face it, had Corbyn won we would have been living in a more equitable country anyway, and a reformation of the electoral system would have been far less urgent. Since then we've seen an increasing shift to the right, not to mention the unimaginable levels of corruption around but not limited to the covid epidemic.

As for Starmer, he has been very busy purging Labour of left wing members including Jewish anti Zionists, some of whom have been members longer than he has been alive so now there are even more disenfranchised people than ever. Without PR I can't see how we can ever halt this rightward shift.
 
Scrote said:
Brexit, and the clusterfuck that followed, would mean the political classes would make sure that couldn't happen again.

Clegg's PR referendum was scuppered by Cameron only offering a poor choice of AV. That was a deliberate attempt to make the referendum fail. Cameron basically tried the same thing with Brexit and miscalculated badly. He then walked away when he was the only person who could realistically have mitigted the effects of the Brexit result.

There's no way that they'd go to a referendum without absolute clarity on the options and the voting system - presumably a multiple effort approach over a number of years.

Political will is the only ingredient that appears to be in short supply.


I regularly posted to that effect - and long before 2019. It was one of the few things about which I felt disappointment with Corbyn.

I've wanted PR as far back as Blair and voted for the abomination we were offered in Clegg's referendum because it was the only change on offer.
Click to expand...
That's one of the issues with a group debate.

My response was to bbg who used lack of pr as a sick to beat starmer whilst he remained silent on Corbyn. It's like they are held to different standards.

Under starmer you may well get your wish. I don't think pr will be on the manifesto but electoral reform probably will be and that's all Labour needed to push pr through both houses.
 
BlindBoyGrunt said:
PR is something I've always been a proponent of but let's face it, had Corbyn won we would have been living in a more equitable country anyway, and a reformation of the electoral system would have been far less urgent. Since then we've seen an increasing shift to the right, not to mention the unimaginable levels of corruption around but not limited to the covid epidemic.

As for Starmer, he has been very busy purging Labour of left wing members including Jewish anti Zionists, some of whom have been members longer than he has been alive so now there are even more disenfranchised people than ever. Without PR I can't see how we can ever halt this rightward shift.
Click to expand...
But you didn't use it as a stick to beat Corbyn with. The rest is just you whining because the labour party doesn't represent you any more.

That's democracy, live with it.
 
BlindBoyGrunt said:
I think it's absolutely vital that we change our archaic voting system. It ties us into a two party system and far to many people are left unrepresented.
Click to expand...
I think it does too, it needs a bigger discussion to what we actually need, Im sure lots of intelligent non politicians can look at this and find something that is progressive and suitable for now and the future.

The politics we have has failed in a lot of instances.
Leave it to the politicians to reform and change and it will be loaded.
 
Laughing said:
I am not sure how much difference twice the budget will make though zoo.

I fully expect the tories to get battered in the local elections.
Click to expand...
Just add to the deforestation of the planet Laughing with their ridiculous garbage and yes they will be battered at the LEs
 
Scrote said:
Which gaps?

The point we (you and I) were disagreeing on was whether or not the government could provide finance for new power production facilities that remained in public ownership.

The answer, as I see it, is that they can - in exactly the same way as they'd fund any private-partnership venture that was then owned and operated privately.

The shortfall in profit expectations would have to be accounted for but there's nothing other than political will preventing public ownership.
Click to expand...
Yes that is right but I was trying, and obviously failing, to explain that the new green electricity industry is so fragmented and developer led these days that it would be almost impossible to achieve the transition without the full support of the private sector. Disappointing but in my opinion that is the reality. It’s different to trains and the water industry where the infrastructure is largely already in place.
 
Laughing said:
But you didn't use it as a stick to beat Corbyn with. The rest is just you whining because the labour party doesn't represent you any more.

That's democracy, live with it.
Click to expand...

Think this is a bit disingenuous tbh Laughing.

If you're going to post stuff like:

Laughing said:
Under starmer you may well get your wish. I don't think pr will be on the manifesto but electoral reform probably will be and that's all Labour needed to push pr through both houses.
Click to expand...

Which lets be honest, is plucked out of thin air, then obviously someone is going to point out that really there's no reason to think a Starmer government would reform the voting system. That's not beating him with a stick, it's just not engaging in fantasy and make believe. If you were on here saying voting for Starmer will magically cure all disease, and someone said no it won't, it doesn't mean they're holding him to an unfair standard.

www.theguardian.com

Keir Starmer defies call for changes to first past the post voting system

The Labour leader said electoral reform was not a priority and refused to make it one of the party’s election manifesto pledges
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

bylinetimes.com

Keir Starmer Now Opposes Scrapping Westminster’s Voting System for PR in Blow for Reformers – Byline Times

His spokesman told Byline Times that the Labour Leader has a "long-standing view against PR"
bylinetimes.com bylinetimes.com

nation.cymru

Voting reform not a priority for Labour, says Starmer

Sir Keir Starmer has said that electoral reform will not be a priority for a Labour government. Taking questions after a speech in central London, the Labour leader played down any prospect of his party embarking on a project of electoral reform if it takes power after the next general election...
nation.cymru

www.independent.co.uk

Against proportional representation? What else hasn’t Starmer told us? | John Rentoul

The Labour leader says he wants growth rather than higher taxes – but all politicians say that
www.independent.co.uk www.independent.co.uk

And again I come back to one of the points I made yesterday. If you genuinely, truly, honestly believe Starmer is planning to put "voting reform" in his manifesto, and then force PR through Parliament, after spending years telling the press and public he doesn't plan to reform voting - are you actually happy with that? Even if it means the tories are even more unhinged next time they're in power? If it's repeated over a few policies how do you expect the party to win a second term?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top